Quintilian’s Institutio Oratoria is hard to define in terms of genre. It can be read as a justified curriculum for teaching oratory, a philosophy of education, or even a handbook on pedagogy in general. I contend that Quintilian’s Institutio Oratoria can also be conceived as a practical philosophy. I will do so by comparing his conceptions of experience, communal learning environments, and education for sake of democracy with that of John Dewey’s practical philosophy of education. Where appropriate, I will discuss how Dewey expands on these ideas in his imagining of progressive education.
Quintilian does not explicitly position Institutio Oratoria (IO) as a philosophical treatise in any sense, though it may be conceived as a practical philosophy. There are various senses in which we could consider IO a philosophical treatise. In one sense, it can be read as ontological on the basis that it discusses inherent features in individual learners and how natural born abilities could be cultivated. He asserts that the ideal orator must be born ethical and with a naturally superior intellectual capacity. His conception of the perfect orator will not only have “consummate ability in speaking, but also every excellence of mind” (Quintilian, trans. 1987: Preface, 9). It may also be conceived as a discussion of epistemological ideals throughout the lifespan of humans. Murphy (1989) notes that IO explicitly states that learning starts at birth and implies on several instances that it ends only when life ceases. The book also lays out what Quintilian believed to be the proper methods and steps in becoming the ideal orator-citizen. Given these two philosophical assumptions, I propose that the book can most accurately be perceived as a practical philosophy of education. Resting upon the notion that students vary in their capacity and treating them accordingly through carefully thought out and time tested methods, IO reads as a pragmatic guide for anyone involved in the learning process – and as Quintilian argues, no one in the social circumference of the learner is exempt from a role in this process.
The twentieth century saw similar guide in the pragmatist John Dewey in his book Experience & Education (1938). Wary of the unilateral, authoritarian position of the traditional teacher that treated students as passive subjects who merely received knowledge. By in large, this book reimagined the role of both the teacher and the students by shifting the power differential and calling for a more adaptive and increasingly social orientation towards individual learners. Dewey’s conception and advocacy for progressive learning aligns with much of what Quintilian argued for and broadens the project to cultivate a well-rounded citizenry in and outside of the classroom.
Fundamental to each of their projects is the role of experience in education. For Quintilian, experience is always educative, for better or worse, and must be curated in all the student’s settings to create ideal learning circumstances. He prefaces his discussion of orator-citizen training by stating that “nothing is unnecessary to the art of oratory” (Quintilian, trans. 1989: Preface, 5) and education in general if we were to extend his logic across the breadth of subjects. While the focus of OI is rhetorical training, he frequently emphasizes that this should be the case, as the ideal orator-citizen has a well-rounded education. In order to tailor the experiences of the learner, parents must even have nurses, slaves, and other figures surrounding the child in his/her life that are relatively educated (Quintilian, trans. 1987). This principle surely applies to the students experience of figures inside the classroom as well, which will be discussed in further detail below.
Dewey, who also acknowledges that experiences could be miseducative, expands on this notion of experience in the learning process by explicating the significance internal and external experiences of individual students. He argues that each student’s past experience should be tapped into for the purpose of drawing connections between subject matter and their own subjectivity (Dewey, 2007). By doing so, students are able to appropriate knowledge, personalizing otherwise inert information and making it of some significance to their future endeavors, whether educative or material. This allows the student to build upon appropriated knowledge and achieve continuity in their learning, which Quintilian advocates for by emphasizing the importance of constant study and adherence to method. He deepens our understanding of external experiences affecting the educative process by his description of the ideal learning environment. Dewey takes on this notion that the classroom walls are not the boundaries of the student’s learning context – the “conditions of the local community, physical, historical, economic, occupational, etc..” must also be factored into the student’s experience (Dewey, 2007, p. 40). Furthermore, since both Dewey and Quintilian highlight the individuality and capacities of each student, these variables must be considered on a personal level
Quintilian and Dewey also see eye to eye on the significance of a communal learning as part of their ideal holistic context. Quintilian spends time towards the beginning of OI to argue the advantage of public learning as opposed to home school. Not only must the student be in the presence of a good teacher, but good students, as well (Quintilian, trans. 1989). The reasons for this include a pooling of collective knowledge, healthy competition, and most importantly, the opportunity to demonstrate their virtue in a public setting. This opportunity allows the student to orient outwards towards others, rather than centering the educative process solely upon one’s self. Dewey describes this as a collateral learning environment, and advocates it for similar reasons. Aligning with Quintilian’s emphasis on moral training, he believes communal learning is a way of forming “enduring attitudes” and values (Dewey, 2007, p. 48). Furthermore, he adds that students are naturally social beings who must learn to interact and cope with others throughout the entirety of their lives.
These notions of social competence and concern for others are central to the goal of each author’s treatise, namely the cultivation of an ideal citizenry. Underlying Quintilian’s method is the purpose of instilling rhetoric – and the well-rounded education needed to reach be an effective orator – as a tool for citizens to ethically and effectively engage in civic affairs. He states of the ideal orator that “the man who can dually sustain his character as a citizen, who is qualified for the management of public and private affairs… can certainly be nothing else but an orator” (Quintilian, trans. 1989: preface, 10). The culminating experience is the student’s ability to develop and sustain the democracy of the state. Dewey (2007) echoes this concept by conceiving the classroom as a place to practice democracy by cultivating problem solving skills, moral progress, and effective communication. Learning does happen for the sake of being educated, it is directly concerned with influencing self-control and social action.
Taking these similarities into consideration, it can be posited that Quintilian’s Insitutio Oratoria was what Dewey would have considered a progressive form and practical philosophy of communication. Dewey develops on Quintilian’s notion of experience in education by enriching the understanding of the internal and external variables in the student’s learning context. We can also see a parallel between the authors in their positions on communal, public learning, especially for the significant role they play in orienting the student outwards towards others in the community. Broadly, these two authors see these characteristics as practical ways to train people to participate in democracy effectively.
Works Cited
Dewey, J. (2007). Experience and education. Simon and Schuster.
Quintilian on the teaching of speaking & writing: translations from books one, two, & ten of the "Institutio Oratoria" (J. J. Murphy, Trans.). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
